39 replies to this topic

[RedSox44]

Uh...The Tribune Co.?

No, wait, I got it: The College of Coaches!

Eh? Eh?!

Ugh.

I'll show myself out.

[sportstar1212]

RyanB06, on March 26, 2012 - 18:43, said:

epper, on March 26, 2012 - 18:29, said:

Henry Rowengartner.

The Cubs won the WS at the end of Rookie of the Year.

Now for the real reason: they're waiting to beat Miami in 2015...*gets handed note*...oh...forget it.

So maybe Henry jinxed it?

[CS85]

To elaborate more on my unfortunate post which set an awful trend, the Cubs are title-less because of a combination of bad luck, worse signings, and indifferent management - until the last decade or so.  I think the organization finally has a leadership and mentality from on top that could properly build them into something more realistically capable of annual title contention, but it's going to require a long time.

[zpqmaowl]

AC0366103

[NEW.ERA]

They traded Jamie Moyer and Rafael Palmeiro for a bag of s*it. That's one reason of the many reasons.

[oddball]

the admiral, on March 26, 2012 - 19:49, said:

Oddball is classically and traditionally a bad poster.

And I presume that every time you post this, that you write it down in your journal as some sort of accomplishment. "Dear Journal, today Oddball had another bad post. As for me, I've done nothing worth mentioning. I wish people would pay attention to me."

[NJTank]

Because they did not let that damn goat in.

[BlueSky]

Is the thread subject a rhetorical question? It's not like the Cubs own futility. Ask Vikings fans or Bills fans. 0-4 in the Super Bowl? Ouch.

[waltere]

BlueSky, on March 27, 2012 - 05:36, said:

Is the thread subject a rhetorical question? It's not like the Cubs own futility. Ask Vikings fans or Bills fans. 0-4 in the Super Bowl? Ouch.

At least they've made it to the 'final' though  

[CubsFanBudMan]

I think the admiral has covered it pretty well in his posts, although at Game 1 in 2008, it didn't get quiet until the grand slam. That's when I realized the fanbase had been "ruined" by the success that came up short in 2003, the collapse of 2004, and to a lesser degree, 2007.

2006 was not a team built to "win now." 2004, 2007, 2008 and the unfortunate 2009 starring special guest Milton Bradley are the only years that qualify for that status. As much as the Alfonso Soriano deal is ripped now, it worked. They were a 90-loss team that went to the postseason the next two years. The bad back end of the deal just started sooner than expected.

I also don't think Lou Piniella is given enough blame for the playoff failures in 2007 and 2008. He made lineup changes or pitching moves that made little sense (Fukudome sat most of September but returned to the starting lineup for the playoffs, Ted Lilly didn't pitch in the 2008 NLDS so Harden could, Zambrano was pulled in Game 1 of the 2007 NLDS to keep him fresh for a Game 4 that was "if necessary" to begin with but ultimately never happened, No. 3-at-best Dempster getting the nod in Game 1 in 2008). In 2008, they were the best team (by record) in the NL and got swept.

So to answer your question, IMO, the Cubs haven't won mostly because of cheap or bad ownership/management, and the few times they have had a championship-caliber team, a combo of mismanagement on the field and a bit of bad luck prevented it. And some fan down the left field line had zero to do with it.

And then there's this that occured to me watching last year's postseason: The Cardinals are a franchise that often wins even when it is expected to lose, while the Cubs lose even when they are expected to win. That's not a curse, but it might be a mentality that hangs over the team a little too much, and certainly the fanbase (as in the case of that grand slam in 2008). Getting rid of a guy named Crane Kenney who hires a priest to sprinkle holy water in the dugout and insults the season ticket holders by saying we're all scalpers and aren't paying enough for tickets for a losing team would be a good start, too.

[McCarthy]

The mentality thing is something I think about all the time. Why does is seem some franchises prevail so often when really they aren't that much better than other franchises? I think it's because they don't treat winning the championship as if it's this grand accomplishment and they expect to win it every year. The New York Giants, Green Bay Packers, Pittsburgh Steelers, St. Louis Cardinals, San Antonio Spurs, Detroit Red Wings all come to mind. Sure, they've had good teams, but they haven't been the greatest teams in the history of their sports and yet they continue to win.

In those organizations winning a championship is a tangible, real thing that can be accomplished. In organizations like the Cubs, the pre-04 Red Sox, the pre 05 White Sox, winning the World Series is a myth that can only happen in theory because nobody's ever seen it happen in real life. It's treated like a fairy tale and until the fans and ownership stop treating it like such they're never going to win.


Also, there's a team in New York that's taken up about 1 out of every 5 World Series ever won so that's eliminated a lot of chances for a lot of teams to win a championship.

[CDixonDesign]

epper, on March 26, 2012 - 18:29, said:

Henry Rowengartner.

I seriously just startled my entire office by LOL'ing.

Should have blamed it on Phil Brickma:

[BlueSky]

waltere, on March 27, 2012 - 06:29, said:

BlueSky, on March 27, 2012 - 05:36, said:

Is the thread subject a rhetorical question? It's not like the Cubs own futility. Ask Vikings fans or Bills fans. 0-4 in the Super Bowl? Ouch.

At least they've made it to the 'final' though  

So have the Cubs, and won it too. Just not recently enough for some. ;-)

And don't worry...it'll happen again.

[RedSox44]

BlueSky, on March 27, 2012 - 10:07, said:

waltere, on March 27, 2012 - 06:29, said:

BlueSky, on March 27, 2012 - 05:36, said:

Is the thread subject a rhetorical question? It's not like the Cubs own futility. Ask Vikings fans or Bills fans. 0-4 in the Super Bowl? Ouch.

At least they've made it to the 'final' though  

So have the Cubs, and won it too. Just not recently enough for some. ;-)

And don't worry...it'll happen again.

I would've gone with this:

[cornettored]

Well if the Cubs do win this year, we all know who to blame on 12/21.

[JDynamo]

cornettored, on March 28, 2012 - 20:56, said:

Well if the Cubs do win this year, we all know who to blame on 12/21.

This has crossed my mind so many times haha.  I was thinking well if the world's supposed to end 12/21 I guess the Cubs will win the World Series this year to start the process

[BlueSky]

RedSox44, on March 27, 2012 - 11:02, said:

BlueSky, on March 27, 2012 - 10:07, said:

waltere, on March 27, 2012 - 06:29, said:

BlueSky, on March 27, 2012 - 05:36, said:

Is the thread subject a rhetorical question? It's not like the Cubs own futility. Ask Vikings fans or Bills fans. 0-4 in the Super Bowl? Ouch.

At least they've made it to the 'final' though  

So have the Cubs, and won it too. Just not recently enough for some. ;-)

And don't worry...it'll happen again.

I would've gone with this:

As I would have had I known about it. Awesome commercial.

[Raysfan12]

Lets see; terrible GM decisions, bad moments, and Wrigley Field (Cubs won 2 WS before that ballpark). I swear the only three good things that happened during the curse were getting Ryne Sandberg, the 2008 team, and that 2003 NLCS.

[Saintsfan]

Partly its starts with the fact that Chicago was at the western limits of baseball in the early days. Its a hard slog to be playing ball and travelling by road or rail. The Yankees and earlier the Red Sox had the advantage of generally shorter journeys. The Cardinals found a way of coping, partly through the farm system and the liberty it gave the Cardinals to use a larger player pool.

[MadmanLA]

Saintsfan, on March 29, 2012 - 10:15, said:

Partly its starts with the fact that Chicago was at the western limits of baseball in the early days. Its a hard slog to be playing ball and travelling by road or rail. The Yankees and earlier the Red Sox had the advantage of generally shorter journeys. The Cardinals found a way of coping, partly through the farm system and the liberty it gave the Cardinals to use a larger player pool.

Actually, St. Louis was always the western limits of Major League Baseball, of course before Los Angeles and San Francisco got teams.  The Cardinals, in fact under the leadership of Branch Rickey in the 1920s and '30s, created the minor league system we all know of today.

As for the Cubs...it's pretty much already lined-out on the "whys"; indifferent ownerships, an extemely-old ballpark used more as a tourist attraction, spending tons on free agents as "band-aids" rather than developing talent in the minor leagues, and using games as filler programming on local TV.